Asad Ali Shah, Member.-These are three revision petitions against the order of Commissioner, Multan dated 11-11-1985, whereby he dismissed the appeals of the petitioners against orders of District Collector, dated 27-11-1982 being time barred. The District Collector had cancelled the allotments made in favour of the petitioners under Islamabad Outsees Scheme for non payment of dues by separate orders and directed to resume the land and to recover the outstanding amount as arrears of Land Revenue. All the three petitions will be disposed of by this single order.
2. Facts of the cases are that Sqr. No. 13/13m, 14 to 25, measuring 100 kanals situated in Otak No. 59/M, Tehsil Lodhran was respectively allotted to Akbar tan and Muhammad Aslam on 6-10-1966 under Islamabad Oustee Scheme. The G. A. (R) reported that allottees had not paid the sale price of the land each and the D. C./Collector consequently issued them notices under section 24 of Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912, out none appeared. The D.C./Collector observed that although advance of 1/10th had been paid, no instalments had been deposited thereafter. He, therefore, cancelled the leases and resumed the land. Consequently, the A.
C/Collector leased out Sqr. No. 13/i3m, 19 to 25 on 30-4-1985 for 2 years from Kharif 1985 to Rabi 1987 to one Muhammad Idrees. Aggrieved by the orders, petitioners appealed to the Commissioner Multan, who dismissed these being time barred. Hence these revision petitions.
3. I have heard the petitioner. Their learned counsel contended that the order dated 27-11-1982 were passed by the DC/Collector without hearing the petitioners, and in any case non-payment of instalments was a rectifiable breach ot condition which should not entail the ultimate resumption of land. He claimed toat the petitioners had deposited advance money as well as some instalments and had requested the Collector to forward their cases to the Board of Revenue lor confirmation of sale, and the concerned officials had assured them that alter obtaining permission from the Board ot Revenue they would he infromed to deposit the instalments. However, no such information was communicated and the lands were resumed. He argued that the petitioners reside at Islamabad and this fact was on record, but notices were sent to them in chart No. 59/M, and if their absence was reported by the process server, notices should have been sent to the petitioners on the present au dress available on record. He urged that had notices been issued at the correct address and the petitioners informed they would have appeared and deposited the defaulted instalments. The petitioners were prepared to deposit the outstanding dues. He further argued that the land was leased to Muhammad Idrees on 30-4-1985, but was confirmed by the D.C./Collector on 3-3-1986 i.e. After about one year, which was irregular.
4. Muhammad Idrees respondent contended that he obtained the lease in open auction and paid the rent thereafter he was given possession of the land. He urged that he be allowed to complete his lease period.
The representative of the Department stated that the petitioners failed to deposit 4 consecutive instalments and the lots were liable for resumption. He argued that it was for the petitioners to make arrange- ment to receive the communication issued by the Department in their names at the address in the Chak.
6. I have considered the arguments and perused the record, The lots were allotted to the petitioners in lieu of the land resumed from them by the Capital Development Authority, Islamabad. They were to obtain the proprietary rights of the land after payment of fixed price by instalments. Non payment of instalments is a rectifiable breach. I, therefore, restore the lots subject to the payment of outstanding instalment along- with interest/penal interest and a penalty of rupees one thousand in each case within one month after the calculation of outstanding amount is made by the D.C./Collector, and intimated to the petitioners on their known addresses by registered post. Square No. 13/13m 14 to 25 were leased to Muhammad Idrees from Kharif 1985 to Rabi 1987. The lessee will continue to cultivate the land for the period for which he had already paid the rent and thereafter he would surrender the possession of the land and would not be allowed to deposit fresh rent.